Critical Education and Insurgent Pedagogies | 405 Critical Education and Insurgent Pedagogies: An Interview with E. Wayne Ross Carlo Fanelli Carlo Fanelli1 (CF): Before working in the post-secondary education sector, you also taught as a pre-school and high-school instructor. Could you explain the impact that neoliberalism has had philosophically and as a political economic project on the institutional aspects of education. Have there been noticeable cultural shifts, differences in pedagogical emphases or allocation of funding priorities? E. Wayne Ross2 (EWR): For more than three decades now there has been a steady intensification of education reforms worldwide aimed at making public schools and universities more responsive to the interests of capital than ever before. And, neoliberal ideology is at the heart of what’s been labelled the global education reform movement or GERM. Key neoliberal principles such as reducing government spending for education (and other social services) and privatizing public enterprises has led to targeting the very existence of public education or more precisely education in the public interest. Indeed, a key aim of neolib- eralism is the destruction of the commons, the very idea of the common 1 Carlo Fanelli is a Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council Postdoctoral Fellow at the Department of Politics and Public Administration, Ryerson University, and Scholar-In- Residence at the Global Labour Research Centre, York University. In addition to serving as editor of Alternate Routes, he has published widely on critical political economy, labour studies, Canadian public policy, climate change, social movements, urban sociology and education. He maintains a collection of his writing at www.carlofanelli.org 2 E. Wayne Ross is Professor in the Department of Curriculum and Pedagogy and co-director of the Institute for Critical Education Studies at The University of British Columbia. He has published more than 20 books and over 200 articles, book chapters, essays, and reviews on curriculum studies, social studies education, teacher education, and critical pedagogy. His most recent books include: The Social Studies Curriculum: Purposes, Problems, and Possibilities (4th Edition, State University of New York Press, 2014) and Critical Theories, Radical Pedagogies, and Social Education (with Abraham DeLeon, Sense Publishers, 2010). Wayne is co-founder of The Rouge Forum and co-editor of the academic journals Workplace, and Critical Education. He maintains a collection of his writing at http://blogs.ubc.ca/ross/ 406 | Neoliberalism and the Degradation of Education good, instead substituting individualism and individual responsibility. This idea is reflected in Stephen Harper’s calls to avoid “committing sociology” or Margaret Thatcher’s declaration that there is “no such thing as society.” Denying the existence of the commons and public interests transforms long held notions about what democracy is and the role of public education in democratic societies. Neoliberal education reform aims for a large-scale transformation of public education that opens it up to private investment, enabling extrac- tion of private profits. In 2005, the global education market was valued at $2.5 trillion; and the latest estimates are $4.4 trillion, with projections for rapid growth over the next five years. So, the opportunity for profit extraction is huge. Corporations and the governments that serve their interests, along with neoliberal think tanks like the Fraser Institute and Frontier Centre and philantrocapitalist entities like the Gates, Broad, and Walton Foundations have been systematically reconstructing the discourse about public education as well as education funding and the nature of teaching and learning that goes in classrooms so that public education better serves the interests of capital. As a result, education aimed at helping students develop personally meaningful understand- ings of the world and contributing to a flourishing civil society is stifled. There are three key strategies of neoliberal education reform: (1) School choice and privatization; (2) human capital policies for teachers; and (3) standardized curriculum coupled with the increased use of standardized testing. Charter schools are publicly funded inde- pendent schools that are attended by choice. Neoliberal education reformers promote policies that would close public schools deemed “low performing” and replace them with publicly funded, but privately run charters and/or expanded use of vouchers and tax credit subsidies for private school tuition. Human capital policies for teachers aim to alter the working conditions of teachers, which makes eliminating or limiting the power of teacher unions a primary objective of neoliberal education reform. Human capital education policies include increasing class size (often tied to firing teaching staff); eliminating or weakening of tenure and seniority rights; using unqualified or “alternatively certi- fied” teachers; increasing the hours that teachers work and reducing sick leave; and replacing governance by locally elected school boards, with various forms of mayoral and state takeover or private management; and using the results of student standardized tests to make teacher personnel decisions in hiring, firing, and pay. Critical Education and Insurgent Pedagogies | 407 Key parts of the education reform discourse in the USA, which can be traced directly through every Republican and Democratic presidential administration from Reagan to Obama, include a focus on standardiza- tion of the curriculum and de-professionalization of teachers as teaching is increasingly reduced to test preparation. From Reagan’s A National At Risk, to George H. W. Bush’s National Education Summits, Clinton’s Goals 2000, to George W. Bush’s No Child Left Behind Act, and Obama’s Race To the Top, there has been an ever tightening grip on what students learn and what teachers teach. The primary instruments used in the surveillance of teachers and students and enforcement of official knowl- edge has been the creation of state level curriculum standards paired with standardized tests, creating bureaucratic accountability systems that undermine the freedom to teach and learn. In parallel to the rise of standards-based, test-driven education there is been an ever growing resistance at the grassroots levels in the USA. What started has a small movement in the education community in the 1990s – led by groups such as the Rouge Forum, Chicago public schools teachers and other educators who produce the newspaper Substance, including teacher and writer Susan Ohanian, The National Center for Fair and Open Testing (FairTest) and the Rethinking Schools collective – has blossomed into a wide-spread resistance movement.3 For example, teachers in Chicago and Seattle have recently won important victories for the resistance to corporate education reforms. While community-based groups across the USA continue to gain trac- tion in efforts to derail test-driven education, the education de-formers led by Obama’s education secretary Arne Duncan and corporate/philan- thropic backers including the Gates, Broad and Walton Family founda- tions still have the upper hand, demanding use of student standardized tests results to make teacher personnel decisions in hiring, firing, and pay. And, the next big thing in standardized curriculum is known as the Common Core State Standards, which were created by Gates Founda- tion consultants for the National Governors Association. The Common Core is, in effect, a national curriculum that will be enforced via tests that are currently being developed by publishing behemoth Pearson. The political and educational landscape in Canada differs in impor- tant ways from the USA, but it is certainly not immune from the delete- rious effects of neoliberal education reform. The Canadian education 3 See, for example: FairTest’s “Testing and Resistance Reform News” (http://fairtest.org/ news/other); Substance News (http://www.substancenews.net/); Susan Ohanian’s website (http://www.susanohanian.org/); Rethinking Schools (http://www.rethinkingschools.org/); and The Rouge Forum website (http://www.rougeforum.org/). 408 | Neoliberalism and the Degradation of Education system is a collection of regional systems in which governments have advanced neoliberal agendas for public education, including “increasing choice” by fostering private schools, introducing a number of market mechanisms into the public education, imposing standardized tests that used to create ranking or “league tables” to enhance competition between schools as well as allowing private companies to advertise in schools. The province of British Columbia, in particular, is an important battleground over neoliberal education reform. BC is home to one of the most politically successful neoliberal governments in the world and schoolteachers have been waging a pitched battle against the BC Liberals since the party swept into power in 2001. I’ll say more on that later. School governance in the province is also entirely top-down, with the appearance of local influence via local school planning councils. While BC does not have the proliferation of standardized tests that exist in the USA, standardized tests scores are used by the Fraser Institute, an influ- ential neoliberal think tank, to rank schools in BC. Fraser Institute rank- ings are used to promote the notion “choice” in education and generally serve as a means for categorizing poorer, more diverse public schools